Jᴀᴄᴜʀᴜᴛᴜ - Tʜᴇ Cᴀsᴛ Oᴜᴛ

you make bunny face-palm ...

My GAWD ... I'm being closed captioned for the hearing impaired!

Well, I really appreciate the input, Redstar, and I totally agree with what you are saying. I misunderstood, I assumed you meant that the idea of drastic changes becoming traits, like blond hair, or brown eyes was not plausible. No, I agree. I think it's fitting to note that alot of this I don't want to just up and say "this happened because of this", because it gives me room to let the imagination take shape into what happens.

As for the other group... perhaps a civil dispute makes these colonies split... some believe the way to survive is one way, and another is convinced of another way. Both systems work, but they fight over the resources used to adhere to these methods.

E. LeGuille wrote:So, 35,000 years -- this can happen. Trust me, I know it seems like it would be insane to assume such drastic changes take place, but it was less than 6,000 years that some people believe the earth was made, flooded, and is what it is today. Those people are not necessarily crazy, but we don't take that theory seriously because it has bias.

What are you even talking about here? An evolution of a theory/iddea (creation myth) is not the same as biological evolution; ideas change faster in a shorter span of time. (For further reference, I suggest that you take a look at the concept of "memes.")

E. LeGuille wrote:I do not have bias. I have asked several people who are doctors, anthropologists, and zoologists, if these things happen to birds and mammals, what of humans? Same thing: Our environment changes us.

Species adapt to environmental factors, often changing ones. I'd imagine that if you were cooped up in a spacecraft for 35,000 years you'd want to maintain an Earth-like environment to prevent dangerous mutations from being introduced.

Slugger wrote:

E. LeGuille wrote:So, 35,000 years -- this can happen. Trust me, I know it seems like it would be insane to assume such drastic changes take place, but it was less than 6,000 years that some people believe the earth was made, flooded, and is what it is today. Those people are not necessarily crazy, but we don't take that theory seriously because it has bias.

What are you even talking about here? An evolution of a theory/iddea (creation myth) is not the same as biological evolution; ideas change faster in a shorter span of time. (For further reference, I suggest that you take a look at the concept of "memes.")

Evolution does happen, and so does creation. Some believe one is seperate from the other. I don't see the conflict in what I was saying.

Slugger wrote:

E. LeGuille wrote:I do not have bias. I have asked several people who are doctors, anthropologists, and zoologists, if these things happen to birds and mammals, what of humans? Same thing: Our environment changes us.

Species adapt to environmental factors, often changing ones. I'd imagine that if you were cooped up in a spacecraft for 35,000 years you'd want to maintain an Earth-like environment to prevent dangerous mutations from being introduced.

The premise is that as much as you want to maintain a habitat like earth, you cannot do so because of the limitations you have. The story's premise is that they were forced, without time to make these adjustments for gravity, etc. So it is a sort of bare-basics survival. Many children are not going to know what Earth was ever like, so I don't think that even if time allowed it, that people would always go for it. It's about surviving over being comfortable.

I'm just going to come out and say that I feel your story has no real story to it.

There are four basic forms of story that can be written: mileu, idea, (un)balance, and character.


Mileu deals with setting and the only reason there's a character at all is to show the reader the wondrous world he's in. Think Wizard of Oz.

Idea works off of mystery. A question is raised, and the story ends when it's answered. An analogue would be 2001: A Space Odyssey. (What the hell is this monolith? Oh, now we know. *Bowman flies off into the distance*)

(Un)Balance suggests that something is introduced into the world that threatens its very existence. For Lord of the Rings, it's the ring. For Dune, it's the Kwisatz Haderach (A child that never should have been born) The story ends when the disturbance is quelled and the world either returns to status quo, or is irrevocably changed.

Character, quite obviously, deals with a character and how they develop throughout. Generally a story uses one or more of the earlier forms and wraps it around a central character that changes in reaction to the mileu, idea, or unbalance.


From what I've read, I feel you're either going the Oz route (look at earth and how it's changed), and/or ideas: Evolution and social change and the end of humanity, oh my!

Cool ideas and interesting places don't make a good story, unless you're the best and can make it work. Depending on which form of story you choose, the story can be told in many different ways. I recommend you take a good look at what the point of the story is and start from there. Mr. Jason is probably a good starting point... What does he want? Why does he want it? Is it curiosity? Is it survival? Or is it just numbness of loss? If you can't give a good reason why he's wandering around dealing with spider-babies, then your story isn't offering much.

Bravo.

Most useful bit of criticism I've gotten so far.

But so you know, we've been discussing a single plotline. Not the story.

I engaged you so much because I was interested to hear how plausible you thought the evolution was.

But, nonetheless: Thank you.

Maybe I should move on to doing Star Wars Novels... I mean, it's already been stamped on. I never read one of those before, either. I should write some inquels to the Jedi Academy Trilogy.

A single plot-line? A novel may appear to have different stories fleshing out the plot, but in reality they all have a purpose. Everything happens so the character can either act or react, and in so doing eventually develop as a person until that fateful moment when they finally make a change for their self or their world. A novel isn't made up of random scenes and ideas, no matter how much it may seem that way. Even Hitchhiker's, the ultimate in science fiction parody, doesn't resort to one-shot jokes every time.

I'm not saying your story doesn't have anything cohesive to it, but after discussing various concepts (which you apparently hadn't even fleshed out yourself) and reading one excerpt, I was under the impression not much was offered. Even your summaries didn't amount to much but telling me what things happened. I don't care about what happened, but why, and to whom. Note that Dune deals with universal themes and things outside the scope of any one person, but the stories always come back to the characters. They may not be able to handle everything themselves, but they sure as hell try. Their story is far more important to me than the explosions and gunshots in the galactic distance.

So, again, I'm not trying to judge your work... But these are things you really need to consider if you want to be a writer.

And all of your critiques are taken into good, honest light.

I am just telling you, you're hyperfocusing on one issue, and I have not presented my themes yet. I was discussing one piece, not all of them. The fact that you are interested, interests me.

So, for safety practices, I will reconsider submitting for approval, since I was, originally, wanting a critique on the violence scene, and not the rest.

This was never about the story, but I shared one piece with you. You are judging the one piece as the whole. I am not done with all of these ideas yet, so I presented you one idea. It's not the story, it's a piece of something these characters revolve around. Jason Bell is just one character.

Okay. You just defended yourself four times in four paragraphs. That's cool, I respect that.

Now get to the actual writing and prove you have more to this story than what you've shown.

E. LeGuille wrote:And all of your critiques are taken into good, honest light.

What? What the fuck does that even mean? You aren't a native speaker, are you?

I am just telling you, you're hyperfocusing on one issue, and I have not presented my themes yet. I was discussing one piece, not all of them. The fact that you are interested, interests me.

So, for safety practices, I will reconsider submitting for approval, since I was, originally, wanting a critique on the violence scene, and not the rest.

This was never about the story, but I shared one piece with you. You are judging the one piece as the whole. I am not done with all of these ideas yet, so I presented you one idea. It's not the story, it's a piece of something these characters revolve around. Jason Bell is just one character.

Redstar wrote:Okay. You just defended yourself four times in four paragraphs.

Even though he can't write worth shit, KJA can teach wannabes many other important things.

you make bunny snarky.

I am a native speaker, I just have an obvious brain disorder, called Preeqosis Mentalus Minimus. Prevents my brain from functioning at levels higher than that of a cockroach for several hours. Almost like a seizure, but lasts for a long time. Usually induced by reading certain books.

Ooh, let me guess which ... Dr Zhivago?



(Oh, dear ... that's the second time today someone has thrown mangled "Latin" at me. [The first was Sandwurm88 in a comment on my blog.] I think I'll have to go have a lie-down out back in the hammy. )

SandChigger wrote:Ooh, let me guess which ... Dr Zhivago?



(Oh, dear ... that's the second time today someone has thrown mangled "Latin" at me. [The first was Sandwurm88 in a comment on my blog.] I think I'll have to go have a lie-down out back in the hammy. )

You should do that a LOT more often.

Just ignore Chig and focus on your work, unless he's directly critiquing it.

I don't want to come off like a douchebag, as I apparently am prone to, but when it comes to your work I feel the way that I do. You may have only intended a critique of that single excerpt, but that's just not how it works. I can't offer you anything without the whole thing to work over.

It seems to me you wrote a scene that stood out in your mind and that's good, it is, I do the same and piece them together later. But what seems wrong is you're still developing plot lines and train of events prior and post this excerpt, so writing the scene is meaningless. You may end up contradicting it later on. The only way a story comes out is if you work from the very end, then jump to the beginning, then fill out in in-between. And I can't say this enough, but your focus should be the characters.

A story is epic not for their scope in ideas, or how far the events are spread throughout the galaxy, but how inherently flawed yet heroic the characters are. Start there. Do nothing else until you have a beginning, middle, end of every character.

Redstar wrote:But what seems wrong is you're still developing plot lines and train of events prior and post this excerpt, so writing the scene is meaningless. You may end up contradicting it later on.

There's a choice bit you should actually send to KJA.

SandChigger wrote:

Redstar wrote:But what seems wrong is you're still developing plot lines and train of events prior and post this excerpt, so writing the scene is meaningless. You may end up contradicting it later on.

There's a choice bit you should actually send to KJA.

KJA is published. I doubt any advice an amateur writer like myself would be helpful to someone like him.

I don't really see the fact that he is published as relevant.

He's a shit writer and obviously needs all the help he can get.

Published equates to quality. He hasn't taken advice on writing before, so he clearly must not need it. Logic. (Or just common sense)

Redstar wrote:Published equates to quality.

Oh, bullshit.

Are you going to tell us next that sales equates to quality as well?

Is that not true? KJA seems to suggest such a correlation.

You're an amusing character, Mr. Chig. (The Grinch song came to mind: ~You're a mean one, Mr. Grinch~)